Skip to main content

Methane and the greenhouse-gas footprint of natural gas from shale formations

A letter


We evaluate the greenhouse gas footprint of natural gas obtained by high-volume hydraulic fracturing from shale formations, focusing on methane emissions. Natural gas is composed largely of methane, and 3.6% to 7.9% of the methane from shale-gas production escapes to the atmosphere in venting and leaks over the life-time of a well. These methane emissions are at least 30% more than and perhaps more than twice as great as those from conventional gas. The higher emissions from shale gas occur at the time wells are hydraulically fractured—as methane escapes from flow-back return fluids—and during drill out following the fracturing. Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas, with a global warming potential that is far greater than that of carbon dioxide, particularly over the time horizon of the first few decades following emission. Methane contributes substantially to the greenhouse gas footprint of shale gas on shorter time scales, dominating it on a 20-year time horizon. The footprint for shale gas is greater than that for conventional gas or oil when viewed on any time horizon, but particularly so over 20 years. Compared to coal, the footprint of shale gas is at least 20% greater and perhaps more than twice as great on the 20-year horizon and is comparable when compared over 100 years.


  1. Armendariz A (2009) Emissions from natural gas production in the Barnett shale area and opportunities for cost-effective improvements. Report prepared for Environmental Defense Fund, Austin TX

  2. Bracken K (2008) Reduced emission completions in DJ basin and natural buttes. Presentation given at EPA/GasSTAR Producers Technology Transfer Workshop. Rock Springs Wyoming, 1 May 2008.

  3. Chambers AK (2004) Optical measurement technology for fugitive emissions from upstream oil and gas facilities. Report prepared for Petroleum Technology Alliance Canada by Carbon and Energy Management, Alberta Research Council, Edmonton, Alberta

  4. Cicerone RJ, Oremland R (1988) Biogeochemical aspects of atmospheric methane. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 2:299–327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Council of Scientific Society Presidents (2010) Letter from the council to President Obama and senior administration officials, dated May 4, 2010. Council of Scientific Society Presidents, 1155 16th Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036. Available at

  6. Crutzen PJ (1987) Role of the tropics in atmospheric chemistry. In: Dickinson R (ed) Geophysiology of Amazonia. Wiley, NY, pp 107–129

    Google Scholar 

  7. Eckhardt M, Knowles B, Maker E, Stork P (2009) IHS U.S. Industry Highlights. (IHS) Houston, TX, Feb–Mar 2009.

  8. EIA (2010a) Annual energy outlook 2011 early release overview. DOE/EIA-0383ER(2011). Energy Information Agency, U.S. Department of Energy. Accessed 3 January 2011

  9. EIA (2010b) Natural gas navigator. Natural gas gross withdrawals and production.

  10. EPA (2004) Green completions. Natural Gas STAR Producer’s Technology Transfer Workshop, 21 September 2004.

  11. EPA (2006) Lessons learned: options for reducing methane emissions from pneumatic devices in the natural gas industry. U.S. EPA/ Gas STAR.

  12. EPA (2007) Reducing methane emissions during completion operations. Natural Gas STAR Producer’s Technology Transfer Workshop, 11 September 2007.

  13. EPA (2010) Greenhouse gas emissions reporting from the petroleum and natural gas industry. Background Technical Support Document. Accessed 3 January 2011

  14. Fernandez R, Petrusak R, Robinson D, Zavadil D (2005) Cost-Effective methane emissions reductions for small and midsize natural gas producers. Reprinted from the June 2005 issue of Journal of Petroleum Technology.

  15. GAO (2010) Federal oil and gas leases: opportunities exist to capture vented and flared natural gas, which would increase royalty payments and reduce greenhouse gases. GAO-11–34 U.S. General Accountability Office Washington DC.

  16. Harrison MR, Shires TM, Wessels JK, Cowgill RM (1996) Methane emissions from the natural gas industry. Executive summary, vol 1. EPA-600/R-96-080a. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC

  17. Hayhoe K, Kheshgi HS, Jain AK, Wuebbles DJ (2002) Substitution of natural gas for coal: climatic effects of utility sector emissions. Climatic Change 54:107–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Henke D (2010) Encana, USA division overview. Encana Natural Gas, investors presentation.

  19. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (1995) IPCC second assessment. Climate Change, 1995.

  20. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007) IPCC fourth assessment report (AR4). Working Group 1, The Physical Science Basis.

  21. Jamarillo P, Griffin WM, Mathews HS (2007) Comparative life-cycle air emissions of coal, domestic natural gas, LNG, and SNG for electricity generation. Environ Sci Technol 41:6290–6296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kirchgessner DA, Lott RA, Cowgill RM, Harrison MR, Shires TM (1997) Estimate of methane emissions from the US natural gas industry. Chemosphere 35: 1365–1390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kruuskraa VA (2004) Tight gas sands development—How to dramatically improve recovery efficiency. GasTIPS, Winter 2004.

  24. Lassey KR, Lowe DC, Smith AM (2007) The atmospheric cycling of radiomethane and the “fossil fraction” of the methane source. Atmos Chem Phys 7:2141–2149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lelieveld J, Lechtenbohmer S, Assonov SS, Brenninkmeijer CAM, Dinest C, Fischedick M, Hanke T (2005) Low methane leakage from gas pipelines. Nature 434:841–842

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Liu AE (2008) Overview: pipeline accounting and leak detection by mass balance, theory and hardware implementation. Quantum Dynamics, Woodland Hills. Available at

  27. National Research Council (2009) Hidden costs of energy: unpriced consequences of energy production and use. National Academy of Sciences Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  28. New York Department of Environmental Conservation (2009) Draft supplemental generic environmental impact statement on the oil, gas and solution mining regulatory program.

  29. Nisbet EG, Manning MR, Lowry D, Lassey KR (2000) Methane and the framework convention on climate change, A61F-10, Eos Trans. AGU 81(48), Fall Meet. Suppl

  30. Pacala S, Socolow R (2004) Stablization wedges: solving the climate problem for the next 50 years with current technologies. Science 305:968–972

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Percival P (2010) Update on “lost and unaccounted for” natural gas in Texas. Basin Oil and Gas. Issue 32.

  32. Reshetnikov AI, Paramonova NN, Shashkov AA (2000) An evaluation of historical methane emissions from the Soviet gas industry. JGR 105:3517–3529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Revkin A, Krauss C (2009) By degrees: curbing emissions by sealing gas leaks. New York Times, 14 October 2009. Available at

  34. Samuels J (2010) Emission reduction strategies in the greater natural buttes. Anadarko Petroleum Corporation. EPA Gas STAR, Producers Technology Transfer Workshop Vernal, Utah, 23 March 2010.

  35. Santoro R, Howarth RW, Ingraffea T (2011) Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions inventory of Marcellus shale gas. Technical report of the Agriculture, Energy, & Environment Program, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. To be archived and made available on-line

  36. Shindell DT, Faluvegi G, Koch DM, Schmidt GA, Unger N, Bauer SE (2009) Improved attribution of climate forcing to emissions. Science 326:716–718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Shires TM, Loughran, CJ, Jones S, Hopkins E (2009) Compendium of greenhouse gas emissions methodologies for the oil and natural gas industry. Prepared by URS Corporation for the American Petroleum Institute (API). API, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  38. Wood R, Gilbert P, Sharmina M, Anderson K, Fottitt A, Glynn S, Nicholls F (2011) Shale gas: a provisional assessment of climate change and environmental impacts. Tyndall Center, University of Manchester, Manchester, England.

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert W. Howarth.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

(DOC 44.5 kb)

Rights and permissions

Open Access This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License (, which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Howarth, R.W., Santoro, R. & Ingraffea, A. Methane and the greenhouse-gas footprint of natural gas from shale formations. Climatic Change 106, 679 (2011).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI:


  • Methane
  • Greenhouse gases
  • Global warming
  • Natural gas
  • Shale gas
  • Unconventional gas
  • Fugitive emissions
  • Lifecycle analysis
  • LCA
  • Bridge fuel
  • Transitional fuel
  • Global warming potential
  • GWP